Hollywood elites and members of the upper echelon of political life have long been fascinated by the comings and goings of the Kennedy family. In what is nothing less than an obsession, America’s “Camelot” has been a chink in the armor of many who take part in human rights’ campaigns and demand that rich people spread their wealth around, all the while remaining completely consumed with a family that demonstrated little respect for the rights of women and modeled the benefits of accumulating wealth and power.
On the other hand, Hollywood elites and members of the upper echelon of political life have long been embarrassed by President Ronald Reagan. Far from giving America another “Camelot,” he was born into a relatively poor family, and while children like those in the Kennedy family were learning which utensil to use for the various courses of their meals, a young Reagan was learning to go out into the snow and literally drag his drunk father into the house to keep him from freezing to death on a winter night.
The contrast between the Kennedy’s and Reagan was as great as that between upper white collar and lower blue collar: between a Fortune 500 executive and a brick layer. And with choices like that, elites threw their allegiance to the family (and experience) they’d most like to duplicate.
This was recently brought to mind with a vengeance when the History Channel refused to air an eight-part miniseries on the Kennedy’s, because it cast them in a bad light, but didn’t hesitate to air a special on Reagan that undercut his economic achievements as president. (To be fair, no History Channel representative said the series cast the Kennedy’s in a bad light, but that they pulled it from their lineup because of “pressure from the Kennedy’s over its depiction of the political family.”)
In other words, the Kennedy’s thought the series cast their family in a bad light, and the History Channel kowtowed to the family that gave us the death of Mary Jo Kopechne (Ted Kennedy), allegations of rape (William Kennedy Smith), prescription drug abuse, and “alleged” drunk driving that looked a lot like actual drunk driving with no consequences (Patrick Kennedy). Yet the same network had no problem misrepresenting history when it came to Reagan, and chalking up the economic boom of the 1980s “to the Reagan tax increases.”
That’s right: the Reagan tax increases. (Who knew?)
While alive, Reagan demonstrated the hope of the American dream by working his way up from a life of poverty to become Governor of California and then President of the United States. Along the way, he not only listened to the plight of average Americans but empathized with them and rebuked all who sought to demean them: particularly those who sought to demean them by stealing their freedom via a government that knew no bounds.
Why couldn’t the History Channel communicate this to the 21st century? Why couldn’t they remind us that Reagan cut taxes for the sake of the people and the economy boomed in return?
I guess it’s just easier to play to the elites, and put Reagan in his place while making sure the Kennedy family fan club never has to face the truth.
Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.